hmda_nationwide_aggregations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to reiterate safety. It adds useful context about aggregation and filtering, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or rate limits. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by scope and use case. Every sentence contributes without redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description conveys the nature of the result (aggregate statistics) and offers sufficient context for a read-only data retrieval tool. It lacks details on output structure and edge cases (e.g., empty years), but remains complete enough for typical use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping filters into demographics, loan characteristics, and actions taken, and clarifies year as the required dimension. It does not go beyond the schema but enhances it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a concrete resource ('nationwide mortgage lending aggregation data from HMDA'). It explicitly scopes to 'the entire U.S.' and a given year, which differentiates it from sibling tools like hmda_filtered_aggregations and hmda_rate_spread.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly implies use for national-level mortgage trend analysis and fair lending patterns, and explicitly states nationwide scope. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, such as pointing to hmda_filtered_aggregations for subnational queries.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.